THE PRESIDENT: Please be seated. The 開会／開廷／会期 is 再開するd. （刑事）被告 Bukharin, you may make your last 嘆願.

BUKHARIN: 国民 大統領 and 国民s 裁判官s, I fully agree with 国民 the Procurator regarding the significance of the 裁判，公判, at which were exposed our dastardly 罪，犯罪s, the 罪，犯罪s committed by the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites,” one of whose leaders I was, and for all the activities of which I 耐える 責任／義務.

This 裁判，公判, which is the 結論するing one of a 一連の 裁判，公判s, has exposed all the 罪，犯罪s and the treasonable activities, it has exposed the historical significance and the roots of our struggle against the Party and the Soviet 政府.

		Nikolaj Bukharin (1888-1938). Between 1918 and 1929 he was the 長，指導者 editor of the newspaper Pravda. He was also one of the 創立者s of the Third International (Komintern).

I have been in 刑務所，拘置所 for over a year, and I therefore do not know what is going on in the world. But, 裁判官ing from those fragments of real life that いつかs reached me by chance, I see, feel and understand that the 利益／興味s which we so 有罪に betrayed are entering a new 段階 of gigantic 開発, are now appearing in the international 円形競技場 as a 広大な／多数の／重要な and mighty factor of the international proletarian 段階.

We, the （刑事）被告, are sitting on the other 味方する of the 障壁, and this 障壁 separates us from you, 国民s 裁判官s. We 設立する ourselves in the accursed 階級s of the 反対する-革命, became 反逆者s to the 社会主義者 fatheriand.

At the very beginning of the 裁判，公判, in answer to the question of 国民 the 大統領, whether I pleaded 有罪の, I replied by a 自白.

In answer to the question of 国民 the 大統領 whether I 確認するd the 証言 I had given, I replied that I 確認するd it fully and 完全に.

When, at the end of the 予選 調査, I was 召喚するd for 尋問 to the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事, who controlled the sum total of the 構成要素s of the 調査, he 要約するd them as follows (Vol. V, p. 114, December 1, 1937):

Question:  Were you a member of the centre of the 反対する-革命の organizatlon of the 権利s? I answered: Yes, I 収容する／認める it.

Second question:  Do you 収容する／認める that the centre ot the anti-Soviet organization, of which you are a member, engaged in 反対する-革命の activities and 始める，決める itself the 目的（とする） of violently 倒すing the leadership of the Party and the 政府? I answered: Yes, I 収容する／認める it.

Third question:  Do you 収容する／認める that this centre engaged in テロリスト activities, 組織するd kulak 反乱s and 用意が出来ている for Whiteguard kulak 反乱s against members of the Political Bureau, against the leadership of the Party and the Soviet 力／強力にする? I answered: It is true.

Fourth question:  Do you 収容する／認める that you are 有罪の of treasonable activities, as 表明するd in 準備s for a 共謀 目的（とする）ing at a クーデター d’état? I answered: Yes, that is also true.

In 法廷，裁判所 I 認める and still 収容する／認める my 犯罪 in 尊敬（する）・点 to the 罪，犯罪s which I committed and of which I was （刑事）被告 by 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 at the end of the 法廷，裁判所 調査 and on the basis of the 構成要素s of the 調査 in the 所有／入手 of the Procurator. I 宣言するd also in 法廷，裁判所, and I 強調する／ストレス and repeat it now, that I regard myself 政治上 責任がある the sum total of the 罪，犯罪s committed by the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites.”

I have 長所d the most 厳しい 罰, and I agree with 国民 the Procurator, who several times repeated that I stand on the threshold of my hour of death.

にもかかわらず, I consider that I have the 権利 to 反駁する 確かな 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s which were brought: a) in the printed 起訴，告発, b) during the 法廷，裁判所 調査, and c) in the speech for the 起訴 made by 国民 the Procurator of the U.S.S.R.

I consider it necessary to について言及する that during my 尋問 by 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事, the latter 宣言するd in a very categorical form that I, as one of the （刑事）被告, must not 収容する／認める more than I had 認める and that I must not invent facts that have never happened, and he 需要・要求するd that this 声明 of his should be placed on the 記録，記録的な／記録するs.

I once more repeat that I 収容する／認める that I am 有罪の of 背信 to the 社会主義者 fatherland, the most heinous of possible 罪，犯罪s, of the organization of kulak 反乱s, of 準備s for テロリスト 行為／法令／行動するs and of belonging to an 地下組織の, anti-Soviet organization. I その上の 収容する／認める that I am 有罪の of 組織するing a 共謀 for a ”palace クーデター.” And this, incidentally, 証明するs the incorrectness of all those passages in the specch for the 起訴 made by Cltizen the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事, where he makes out that I 可決する・採択するd the 提起する／ポーズをとる of a pure theoretician, the 提起する／ポーズをとる of a philosopher, and so on. These are profoundly practical 事柄s. I said, and I now repeat, that I was a leader and not a cog in the 反対する-革命の 事件／事情／状勢s. It follows from this, as will be （疑いを）晴らす to everybody, that there were many 明確な／細部 things which I could not have known, and which I 現実に did not know, but that this does not relieve me of 責任／義務.

I 収容する／認める that I am responsible both 政治上 and 合法的に for the defeatist orientation, for it did 支配する in the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites,” although I 断言する:

a) that 本人自身で I did not 持つ／拘留する this position;

b) that the phrase about 開始 the 前線 was not uttered by me, but was an echo of my conversation with Tomsky;

c) that if Rykov heard this phrase for the first time from me, then, I repeat, it was an echo of my conversation with Tomsky.

But I consider myself 責任がある a 墓／厳粛／彫る／重大な and monstrous 罪，犯罪 against the 社会主義者 fatherland and the whole international proletariat. I その上の consider myself responsible both 政治上 and 合法的に for 難破させるing activities, although I 本人自身で do not remember having given directions about 難破させるing activities. I did not talk about this. I once spoke 前向きに／確かに on this 支配する to Grinko. Even in my 証言 I について言及するd that I had once told Radek that I considered this method of struggle as not very expedient. Yet 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 makes me out to be a leader of the 難破させるing activities.

国民 the Procurator explained in the speech for the 起訴 that the members of a ギャング（団） of brigands might commit 強盗s in different places, but that they would にもかかわらず be 責任がある each other. That is true, but ーするために be a ギャング（団） the members of the ギャング（団） of brigands must know each other and be in more or いっそう少なく の近くに 接触する with each other. Yet I first learnt the 指名する of Sharangovich from the 起訴，告発, and I first saw him here in 法廷，裁判所. It was here that I first learnt about the 存在 of Maximov, I have never been 熟知させるd with Pletnev, I have never been 熟知させるd with Kazakov, I have never spoken about 反対する-革命の 事柄s with Rakovsky, I have never spoken on this 支配する with Rosengoltz, I have never spoken about it to Zelensky. I have never in my life spoken to Bulanov, and so on. Incidentally, even the Procurator did not ask me a 選び出す／独身 question about these people.

The ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites” is first and 真っ先の a 圏 ot 権利s and Trotskyites. How then, 一般に, could it 含む Levin, for example, who 明言する／公表するd here in 法廷，裁判所 that to this day he does not know what a Menshevik is? How could it 含む Pletnev, Kazakov and others?

その結果, the （刑事）被告 in this ドッキングする／減らす／ドックに入れる are not a group. They are confederates in a 共謀 along さまざまな lines, but they are not a group in the strict and 合法的な sense of the word. All the （刑事）被告 were connected in one way or another with the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites,” some of them were also connected with 知能 services, but that is all. This, however, 供給するs no grounds for 主張するing that this group is the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites.”

Secondly, the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites,” which 現実に did 存在する and which was 粉砕するd by the 組織／臓器s of the Peoplers Commissariat of 内部の 事件／事情／状勢s, arose 歴史的に. It did really exlst until it was 粉砕するd by the 組織／臓器s of the People’s Commisssariat of 内部の 事件／事情／状勢s. It arose 歴史的に. I have 証言するd that I first spoke to Kamenev as far 支援する as 1928, during the Sixth 議会 of the Comintern, which I at that time directed.

How then can it be 主張するd that the 圏 was 組織するd on the 指示／教授／教育s of 国粋主義者／ファシスト党員 知能 services? Why, this was in l928! By the way, at that time I 辛うじて 行方不明になるd death at the 手渡すs of an スパイ／執行官 of the ポーランドの（人） ”Defensiva,” a fact very 井戸／弁護士席 known to everybody who stood の近くに to the Party leadership.

Thirdly, I categorically 否定する that I was connected with foreign 知能 services, that they were my masters and that I 行為／法令／行動するd in 一致 with their wishes.

国民 the Procurator 主張するs that I was one of the major 組織者s of スパイ, on a par with Rykov. What are the proofs? The 証言 of Sharangovich, of whose 存在 I had not even heard until I read the 起訴，告発.

The 記録，記録的な／記録する of Sharangovich’s 証言 was submitted to me, from which it appears that I 事実上 drew up the 計画（する） for 難破させるing.

SHARANGOVICH: Stop lying, for once in your life at least. You are lying even now in 法廷，裁判所.

THE PRESIDENT: （刑事）被告 Sharangovich, don’t interrupt.

SHARANGOVICH: I could not 抑制する myself.

BUKHARIN: Take Ivanov. 一般に, what I have to say about his 証言 is the に引き続いて. 確かな persons, who were connected with the Okhrana in the past, 証言するd that from 恐れる of （危険などに）さらす they decided to 行う a struggle against the Soviet 力／強力にする, and that they therefore joined the 権利s, the 地下組織の organization, which orientated itself on テロ行為. But where is the logic? 罰金 logic, indeed. From 恐れる of possible （危険などに）さらす they joined a テロリスト organization, where they ran the 危険 of 存在 caught the very next day. This is hard to imagine; I at least cannot imagine it. But 国民 the Procurator believed them, although all of it sounds very unconvincing.

Khodjayev 主張するs that I advised him to get in 接触する with the British 居住（者） スパイ／執行官, while Ikramov says that I told him that Turkestan was a choice morsel for England. In reality, this is far from the truth. I told Khodjayev that advantage should be taken ot the antagonisms between the 帝国主義の 力／強力にするs, and in a vague form I supported the idea of the independence of Turkestan. Not a 選び出す／独身 word was said about any 居住（者） スパイ／執行官s. 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 asked: But did you see Khodjayev? I did. Was this in Tashkent? It was in Tashkent. Did you talk to him about politics? About politics. That means that you spoke about the 居住（者） スパイ／執行官. Such 結論s were drawn several times; and when I 抗議するd against them, 国民 the Procurator （刑事）被告 me of not telling the truth, of trying to wriggle out of it, of wishing to 隠す the truth, and so on; and in this he was supported by a number of my fellow-（刑事）被告. But it seems to me that in this 事例／患者 real logic is wholly on my 味方する. 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 宣言するd on the basis of these 構成要素s that all the スパイ 関係s proceeded through the channels of Rykov and Bukharin. Yet 国民 the Procurator said that every word was important here. The speech of 国民 the Procurator 含む／封じ込めるd 言及／関連s to two Japanese newspapers.. But why does it follow that these 報告（する）／憶測s 言及する 正確に to me and the 権利s?

I, however, 収容する／認める that I am 有罪の of the dastardly 計画（する） of the dismemberment of the U.S.S.R., for Trotsky was 交渉するing about 領土の 譲歩s, and I was in a 圏 with the Trotskyites. This is a fact, and I 収容する／認める it.

I categorically 否定する my complicity in the 暗殺 of Kirov, Menzhinsky, Kuibyshev, Gorky and Maxim Peshkov. によれば Yagoda’s 証言, Kirov was assassinated in 一致 with a 決定／判定勝ち（する） of the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites.” I knew nothing about it. But what 国民 the Procurator calls logic comes here to the 援助（する） of the factual content. He asked whether Bukharin and Rykov could have stood aside from these 暗殺s; and he answered that they could not have stood aside because they knew about them. But not standing aside and knowing are one and the same thing. This is what in elementary logic is called tautology, that is, the 受託 of what is yet to be 証明するd as already proven. But what is the real explanation? It might be said: 井戸／弁護士席, then, you villain, how do you explain these facts? Can you 否定する that some 決定／判定勝ち（する） was 可決する・採択するd by some section or other with the knowledge of Yenukidze and Yagoda, or you 否定する even that? I cannot 否定する it, 国民s 裁判官s. But if I cannot 否定する it, and at the same time cannot 断言する it, I can make a 確かな conjecture. After all, you must 耐える in mind the secrecy of the work. The centre did not 持つ／拘留する 会合s: 事柄s were discussed as occasion arose, and given such secret methods of communication and 関係s with each other, such things are やめる possible.

As to Maxim Peshkov. Yagoda himself says that this 暗殺 関心s him 本人自身で. I have no 権利 to intrude into this sphere. But this is Yagoda’s 声明, 防備を堅める／強化するd by so 根底となる a fact as his request to have the 事柄 heard in camera, a 公正に／かなり 重大な consideration. Yet Kryuchkov says that it was done ーするために lower Maxim Gorky’s buoyant life tonus. And, if I am not mistaken, one of the Counsel for Defence also 可決する・採択するd this viewpoint. But this can be seen through. This argument is 反対するd by so 重大な a fact as Yagoda’s personal 声明, which he 確認するd by the fact that this point was referred to the 開会／開廷／会期 in camera.

As to Menzhinsky. Bulanov 証言するd to personal 動機s here too. Menzhinsky was already ill, he could not have 負傷させるd the ”圏 ot 権利s and Trotskyites” in any way.

Why, then, can this be regarded as likely?

I will dwell on Bulanov’s 証言.

The most painful and most horrible thing is the death ot Alexel Maximovich. What 証言 did I give, how did I give it, and under what circumstances? I was asked (明らかに the 調査 had already furnished 構成要素 on the 支配する) whether I did not 解任する anything that could throw light on the 敵意を持った 態度 of the 権利 and Trotskyite parts of the 圏 に向かって Gorky. I 解任するd the conversation with Tomsky which I について言及するd here in 法廷，裁判所 and about which the Procurator interrogated me. The 実体 of this conversation was that Tomsky cursorily 発言／述べるd that the Trotskyites were 準備するing to commit 敵意を持った 行為／法令／行動するs against the Stalinist, Gorky. It 絶対 did not occur to me at the time that he could 言及する to a テロリスト 行為／法令／行動する. I turned a deaf ear to it. During the 尋問 I 解任するd this conversation with Tomsky. To the insistent 需要・要求するs of 国民 the Procurator I 刻々と replied that the thought of a テロリスト 行為／法令／行動する had not occurred to me at the time. Here in 法廷，裁判所, in reply to one of the questions of 国民 the Procurator, I said: ”But now I see that it was to this he was referring.” 国民 the Procurator drew the に引き続いて 結論 from this; he said: ”What is this, if not a 隠すd admission?” A 隠すd admission of what? What is 認める? The fact that I had learnt in 法廷，裁判所 a number of new facts which had not been known to me, and that therefore the conversation I had had with Tomsky might retrospectively be regarded in an 完全に different 視野. I consider that the argumentation of 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 in this 事例／患者 cannot be regarded as 適する.

The 肩書を与える-page of the ロシアの 版 of ”報告（する）／憶測 of 法廷，裁判所 訴訟／進行s in the 事例／患者 of the Anti-Soviet ’圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites’ heard before the 軍の Collegium of the 最高裁判所 of the U.S.S.R., Moscow, March 2-13, 1938”

Take the year 1918. 国民 the Procurator 宣言するs that in 1924 I was compelled to make a 自白 regarding such and such a conversation in the Smolny. I was not compelled; I experienced 絶対 no 圧力 on me to do so; nobody but myself even hinted at it, and I published this example in order at that time, 1923-24, to show the utter 害（を与える） of the 派閥の struggle, and what it was 主要な to. So that first of all I would like to （疑いを）晴らす up this 誤解.

国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 said that Bukharin 特記する／引用するd nothing in refutation of the 証拠 of the five 証言，証人／目撃するs, who stood here in this 法廷，裁判所 before us all, before 国民s the 裁判官s at this 事例／患者, who 主張するd that I had the design, the thought, the idea, which I insistently 支持するd, of 逮捕（する）ing Lenin and 肉体的に destroying him, and, moreover, to Lenin were 追加するd two other 目だつ 人物／姿／数字s In the Party - Stalin and Sverdlov. But it is not true that I 特記する／引用するd no arguments in refutation. 国民 the Procurator may consider them untrue, feeble, unconvincing, but it cannot be said that I 特記する／引用するd nothing in refutation. I 特記する／引用するd a number of arguments.

The 長，指導者 証言，証人／目撃する was Varvara Nikolayevna Yakovleva. Varvara Nikolayevna Yakovleva dates this whole 出来事/事件 about the preparatlons for the 共謀 with the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs against Lenin, Stalin and Sverdlov, for their 逮捕（する） and supposed 殺人, etc. - she dates all this in her 証拠, and then at the 対決 and during the 裁判，公判 - to the period 事前の to the Peace of Brest-Litovsk. I said at the 対決, at the 予選 調査, and in 法廷，裁判所, that it is not true. It is not true that before the Brest-Litovsk Peace the ”Left 共産主義者s” and the Trotskyites 手配中の，お尋ね者 to 影響 a クーデター d’état by forcible means, it is untrue because the Trotskyites and the いわゆる ”Lefts” had the 大多数 in the Central 委員会, and if the Trotskyites had not capitulated at the 決定的な moment when the 投票（する） on the question of the Brest-Litovsk Peace was taken, the Trotskyites and the ”Lefts” would have had the 大多数 ih the Central 委員会. That 存在 the 事例／患者, how can it be supposed that they then capitulated ーするために 訴える手段／行楽地 to conspiratorial methods? Everybody who lived through that period remembers perfectly 井戸／弁護士席 that the feelings ot the ”Left 共産主義者s” at that time, before the Brest-Litovsk Peace, were such that they hoped to 勝利，勝つ a Party 大多数 at the next Party 議会. That 存在 the 事例／患者 how could there have been any talk about that of which the 証言，証人／目撃する Varvara Nikolayevna Yakovleva now speaks? But I 特記する／引用するd another example. Varvara Nikolayevna Yakovleva 主張するd that the Moscow 地域の Bureau was the 派閥の centre of the ”Left 共産主義者s.” I then took the liberty of について言及するing several 指名するs, several 尊敬（する）・点d members of the Party. I only 手配中の，お尋ね者 in this way to discredit the argument of Varvara Nikolayevna Yakovleva. It is 井戸／弁護士席 known that a numbet of 目だつ people - Kuibyshev, Emelyan Yaroslavsky, Menzhinsky and others - were at that time 支持者s of the ”Left 共産主義者s,” belonged to my ”Left” group. The 親族 importance of these people was far greater than that of the Mantsevs, Stukovs and the 残り／休憩（する）; and by political temperament and political activity they were more efficient than the persons について言及するd. And so until the Brest-Litovsk Peace the central group in Leningrad 構成するd the persons について言及するd. And so I ask, how could there have been a 計画（する） of 反乱 if these people held the 重要な position in the central group? It is 信じられない, it is impossible. And here Varvara Nikolayevna Yakovleva, the prlncipal 証言，証人／目撃する against me, is mixing things up with an 完全に different period, the period に引き続いて the Brest-Litovsk Peace, the Moscow perlod.

I beg your forgiveness, 国民s 裁判官s for 直す／買収する，八百長をするing your attention on this point: but as it is a very 墓／厳粛／彫る／重大な 事柄 and a very 利益／興味ing one, and as so much attention was 充てるd to it in the 法廷，裁判所, I took the liberty of repeating what I have already said. Yet 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 主張するd that I 特記する／引用するd nothing to exonerate myself on this point.

I will not dwell on other things, because I do not want to （問題を）取り上げる your time. I 収容する／認める that there was one conversation with Karelin and Kamkov; and the 率先 with regard to the 逮捕（する） of Lenin for twenty-four hours and the その後の 圏 with the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs proceeded from the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs. But in the first conversation the reply was 消極的な in a rude form. And as regards the fact that 交渉s were subsequently 行為／行うd through-Pyatakov with the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs - and this may be considered, as 国民 the Procurator, if I am not mistaken, 明確に表すd it, an 試みる／企てる to 倒す the Soviet 力／強力にする by forcible means - this I 収容する／認める; it was the 事例／患者. As to the 計画（する） of physical extermination, I categorically 否定する it, and here the logic to which 国民 the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 referred, すなわち, that forcible 逮捕（する） 暗示するd physical extermination, will not help in the least. The 選挙権を持つ／選挙人 議会 was 逮捕（する）d, but nobody 苦しむd 肉体的に. We 逮捕（する）d the 派閥 of the ”Left” 社会主義者-Revrolutionaries, yet not a 選び出す／独身 man of them 苦しむd 肉体的に. The ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs 逮捕（する）d Dzerzhinsky, yet he did not 苦しむ 肉体的に. And I say - and this was omitted from the speech of the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 - that in these 犯罪の and dastardly conversations, it was 特に sti”ulated that not one hair of the persons 関心d should be 負傷させるd. You may think what you like, but it is a real fact.

This episode after the Brest-Litovsk-Peace 一般に took up an 極端に short space of time, because very soon afterwards the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs began to 行為／法令／行動する. We had to 逮捕（する） the 派閥 of ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs. I myself took part in this 操作／手術, I myself took part in directing the 逮捕（する） of the 派閥 ot ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs. After this we had nothing more to do with the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs 一般に. I went abroad on 革命の work, then returned, then, I repeat, I was 負傷させるd by a ”Left” 社会主義者-革命の 爆弾. I do not 否定する that it was not thrown at me 本人自身で, as the 証言，証人／目撃する Mantzev 明言する／公表するd, but I want to say that everybody knew that I was to 配達する a lecture in the building of the Moscow 委員会, and it was at this moment that the 試みる／企てる was made and I was わずかに 負傷させるd. A number of 主要な 人物／姿／数字s in the Party were killed. As is known this 試みる／企てる was made by the 圏 of the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs, 長，率いるd by Cherepanov and his wife, Tamara, with the いわゆる 地下組織の anarchists.

I について言及するd Mantsev because Cherepanov was 逮捕（する）d by the ”Left 共産主義者” Mantsev, as he was not an 同盟（する） of Cherepanov. It is not true that Bela Kun encouraged the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs.

I want to say that there was one 簡潔な／要約する period of 犯罪の 共謀 between the ”Left 共産主義者s” and the ”Left” 社会主義者-革命のs which quickly 崩壊（する）d after their 活動／戦闘, in the 鎮圧 of which a number of ”Left 共産主義者s” took an active part.

To support his speech, the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 前進するd a number of other points which were to 供給する a base for a period, a 黒人／ボイコット period, in my life.

There are a number of mistakes here. First of all, I was never an Otzovist, although the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 says I was.

The 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 告発する／非難するs me of the fact that I worked with Trotsky as an editor ot the magazine ”Novy Mir,” and that I had a 圏 with Trotsky. I 反対する to this.

The 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 告発する／非難するs me of having …に反対するd Comrade Stalin in 1924. I do not remember any such 事例／患者. I now 結論する my 反対s to 確かな 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s which the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事 brought against me in the course of the 裁判，公判, and I will return to the 罪，犯罪s I 現実に did commit. I have already enumerated them twice. The gravity of these 罪，犯罪s is 巨大な. I think it is unnecessary to repeat how 墓／厳粛／彫る／重大な these 罪，犯罪s are; it is （疑いを）晴らす ellough as it is.

I only want to say that the Trotskyite section on more than one occasion 行為／法令／行動するd separatety, and it is possible that individual members of the 圏, like Yagoda, may also have 行為／法令／行動するd 分かれて, because Yagoda, as Bulanov 証言するs, regarded Rykov and myself as his 長官s, and he himself in this 法廷，裁判所 has called me a chatterbox who 組織するd idiotic 集まり 反乱s when it was a question of a クーデター d’état. But I am connected with the ”圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites,” and it is やめる natural that I 政治上 answer 絶対 for everything.

The extreme gravity of the 罪，犯罪 is obvious, the political 責任／義務 巨大な, the 合法的な 責任／義務 such that it will 正当化する the severest 宣告，判決. The severest 宣告，判決 would be 正当化するd, because a man deserves to be 発射 ten times over for such 罪，犯罪s. This I 収容する／認める やめる categorically and without any hesitation at all.

I want 簡潔に to explain the facts regarding my 犯罪の activities and my repentance of my misdeeds.

I already said when giving my main 証言 during the 裁判，公判, that it was not the naked logic of the struggle that drove us, the 反対する revolutlonary conspirators, into this stinking 地下組織の life, which has been exposed at this 裁判，公判 in all its starkness. This naked logic of the struggle was …を伴ってd by a degeneration of ideas, a degeneratlon of psychology. a degeneration of ourselves, a degeneration of people. There are 井戸／弁護士席-known historical examples of such degeneration. One need only について言及する Briand, Mussolini and others. And we too degenerated, and this brought us into a （軍の）野営地，陣営 which in its 見解（をとる）s and features was very much akin to a kulak praetorian fascism. As this 過程 前進するd all the time very 速く under the 条件s of a developing class struggle, this struggle, its 速度(を上げる）, its 存在, 行為／法令／行動するd as the accelerator, as the catalytic スパイ／執行官 of the 過程 which was 表明するd in the acceleration of the 過程 of degeneration.

But this 過程 of degeneration of people, 含むing myself, took place in 絶対 different 条件s from those in which the 過程 of degeneration of the international 労働 leaders in Western Europe took place. It took place まっただ中に colossal 社会主義者 construction, with its 巨大な 範囲, 仕事s, victories, difficulties, heroism ....

And on this basis, it seems to me probable that every one of us sitting here in the ドッキングする／減らす／ドックに入れる 苦しむd from a peculiar duality of mind, an incomplete 約束 in his 反対する-革命の 原因（となる）. I will not say that the consciousness of this was absent, but it was incomplete. Hence a 確かな 半分-paralysis of the will, a retardation of reflexes. It seems to me that we are to a 確かな extent people with retarded reflexes. And this was 予定 not to the absence of 一貫した thought, but to the 客観的な grandeur of 社会主義者 construction. The contradiction that arose between the acceleration of our degeneration and these retarded reflexes 表明するd the position, of a 反対する-革命の, or a developing 反対する-革命の, under the 条件s of developing 社会主義者 construction. A 二重の psychology arose. Each one of us can discern this in his own soul, although I will not engage in a far-reaching psychological 分析.

Even I was いつかs carried away by the eulogies I wrote of 社会主義者 construction, although on the morrow I repudiated this by practical 活動／戦闘s of a 犯罪の character. There arose what in Hegel’s philosophy is called a most unhappy mind. This unhappy mind 異なるd from the ordinary unhappy mind only by the fact that it was also a 犯罪の mind.

The might of the proletarian 明言する／公表する 設立する its 表現 not only in the fact that it 粉砕するd the 反対する-革命の 禁止（する）d, but also in the fact that it 崩壊するd its enemies from within, that it disorganized the will of its enemies. Nowhere else is this the 事例／患者, nor can it be in any 資本主義者 country.

It seems to me that when some of the West European and American 知識人s begin to entertain 疑問s and vacillations in 関係 with the 裁判，公判s taking place in the U.S.S.R., this is まず第一に／本来 予定 to the fact that these people do not understand the 過激な distinction, すなわち, that in our country the antagonist, the enemy, has at the same time a divided, a 二重の mind. And I think that this is the first thing to be understood.

I take the liberty of dwelling on these questions because I had かなりの 接触するs with these upper 知識人s abroad, 特に の中で scientists, and I must explain to them what every Young 開拓する in the Soviet Union knows.

Repentance is often せいにするd to diverse and 絶対 absurd things like Thibetan 砕くs and the like. I must say of myself that in 刑務所，拘置所, where I was 限定するd for over a year, I worked, 熟考する／考慮するd, and 保持するd my clarity of mind. This will serve to 反駁する by facts all fables and absurd 反対する-革命の tales.

Hypnotism is 示唆するd. But I 行為／行うd my own defence in 法廷，裁判所 from the 合法的な 見地 too, orientated myself on the 位置／汚点／見つけ出す, argued with the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事; and anybody, even a man who has little experience in this 支店 of 薬／医学, must 収容する／認める that hypnotism of this 肉親，親類d is altogether impossible.

This repentance is often せいにするd to the Dostoyevsky mind, to the 明確な／細部 所有物／資産／財産s of the soul (”l’âme slave” as it is called), and this can be said of types like Alyosha Karamazov, the heroes of the ”Idiot” and other Dostoyevsky characters, who are 用意が出来ている to stand up in the public square and cry: ”（警官の）巡回区域，受持ち区域 me, 正統派の Christians, I am a villain!”

But that is not the 事例／患者 here at all. ”L’âme slave” and the psychology of Dostoyevsky characters are a thing of the remote past in our country, the pluperfect 緊張した. Such types do not 存在する in our country, or 存在する perhaps only on the 郊外s of small 地方の towns, if they do even there. On the contrary, such a psychology is to be 設立する in Western Europe.

I shall now speak of myself,.of the 推論する／理由s for my repentance. Of course, it must be 認める that 罪を負わせるing 証拠 plays a very important part. For three months I 辞退するd to say anything. Then I began to 証言する. Why? Because while in 刑務所，拘置所 I made a revaluation of my entire past. For when you ask yourself: ”If you must die, what are you dying for?” - an 絶対 黒人／ボイコット vacuity suddenly rises before you with startling vividness. There was nothing to die for, if one 手配中の，お尋ね者 ta die unrepented. And, on the contrary, everything 肯定的な that glistens in the Soviet Union acquires new dimensions in a man’s mind. This in the end 武装解除するd me 完全に and led me to bend my 膝s before the Party and the country. And when you ask yourself: ”Very 井戸／弁護士席, suppose you do not die; suppose by some 奇蹟 you remain alive, again what for? 孤立するd from everybody, an enemy of the people, in an 残忍な position, 完全に 孤立するd from everything that 構成するs the essence of life . . ” And at once the same reply arises. And at such moments, Cltizens 裁判官s, everything personal, all the personal incrustation, all the rancour, pride, and a number of other things, 落ちる away, disappear. And, in 新規加入, when the reverberations of the 幅の広い International struggle reach your ear, all this in its entirety does its work, and the result is the 完全にする 内部の moral victory of the U.S.S.R. over its ひさまづくing 対抗者s. I happened by chance to get Feuchtwanger’s 調書をとる／予約する from the 刑務所，拘置所 library. There he 言及するs to the 裁判，公判s of the Trotskyites. It produced a 深遠な impression on me; but I must say that Feuchtwanger did not get at the 核心 of the 事柄. He stopped half way, not everything was （疑いを）晴らす to him; when, as a 事柄 of fact, everything is （疑いを）晴らす. World history is a worldcourt of 裁判／判断: A number of groups of Trotskyite leaders went 破産者／倒産した and have been cast into the 炭坑，オーケストラ席. That is true. But you cannot do what Feuchtwanger does in relation to Trotsky in particular, when he places him on the same 計画（する） as Stalin. Here his arguments are 絶対 誤った. For in reality the whole country stands behind Stalin; he is the hope of the world; he is a creator. Napoleon once said that 運命／宿命 is politics. The 運命／宿命 of Trotsky is 反対する-革命の politics.

I am about to finish. I am perhaps speaking for the last time in my life.

I am explaining how I （機の）カム to realize the necessity of capitulating to the 調査／捜査するing 当局 and to you, 国民s 裁判官s. We （機の）カム out against the joy of the new life with the most 犯罪の methods of struggle. I 反駁する the 告訴，告発 of having plotted against the life of Vladimir Ilyich, but my 反対する-革命の confederates, and I at their 長，率いる, endeavoured to 殺人 Lenin’s 原因（となる）, which is 存在 carried on with such tremendous success by Stalin. The logic of this struggle led us step by step into the blackest quagmire. And it has once more been 証明するd that 出発 from the position of Bolshevism means 味方するing with political 反対する-革命の banditry. 反対する-革命の banditry has now been 粉砕するd, we have been 粉砕するd, and we repent our frightful 罪，犯罪s.

The point, of course, is not this repentance, or my personal repentance in particular. The 法廷，裁判所 can pass its 判決 without it. The 自白 of the （刑事）被告 is not 必須の. The 自白 of the （刑事）被告 is a 中世 原則 of jurisprudence. But here we also have the 内部の demolition of the 軍隊s of 反対する-革命. And one must be a Trotsky not to lay 負かす／撃墜する one’s 武器.

I feel it my 義務 to say here that in the parallelogram of 軍隊s which went to （不足などを）補う the 反対する-革命の 策略, Trotsky was the 主要な／長／主犯 動機 軍隊. And the most 激烈な／緊急の methods - テロ行為, スパイ, the dismemberment of the U.S.S.R. and 難破させるing - proceeded まず第一に／本来 from this source.

I may infer a priori that Trotsky and my other 同盟（する）s in 罪，犯罪, 同様に as the Second International, all the more since I discussed this with Nikolayevsky, will endeavour to defend us, 特に and 特に myself. I 拒絶する this defence, because I am ひさまづくing before the country, before the Party, before the whole people. The monstrousness of my 罪，犯罪s is immeasurable 特に in the new 行う／開催する／段階 of the struggle of the U.S.S.R. May this 裁判，公判 be the last 厳しい lesson, and may the 広大な／多数の／重要な might of the U.S.S.R. become （疑いを）晴らす to all. Let it be （疑いを）晴らす to all that the counterrevolutionary 論題／論文 of the 国家の limitedness of the U.S.S.R. has remained 一時停止するd in the 空気／公表する like a wretched rag. Everybody perceives the wise leadership of the country that is 確実にするd by Stalin.

It is in the consciousness of this that I を待つ the 判決. What 事柄s is not the personal feelings of a repentant enemy, but the 繁栄するing 進歩 of the U.S.S.R. and its international importance.

公式文書，認める: In the final 判決 of this 裁判，公判, 通知するd on March 13th, 1938, Bukharin, Rykov, Yagoda, Krestinsky, Rosengoltz, Ivanov, Chernov, Grinko, Zelensky, Ikramov, Khodjayev, Sharangovich, Zubarev, Bulanov, Levin, Kazakov, Maximov-Dikovsky, Kryuchkov were 宣告，判決d to be 発射, with the 没収 of all their personal 所有物／資産／財産.

Pletnev was 宣告，判決d to twenty-five years of 監禁，拘置, with deprivation of political 権利s for a period of five years after 満期 of his 刑務所，拘置所 称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 and with the 没収 of all his personal 所有物／資産／財産.

Rakovsky and Bessonov were 宣告，判決d to twenty-five and fifteen years of 監禁，拘置 それぞれ, each with deprivation of political 権利s for a period of five years after the 満期 of their 各々の 刑務所，拘置所 条件, and the 没収 of all their personal 所有物／資産／財産.

The text is from ”報告（する）／憶測 of 法廷，裁判所 訴訟／進行s in the 事例／患者 of the Anti-Soviet ’圏 of 権利s and Trotskyites’ heard before the 軍の Collegium of the 最高裁判所 of the U.S.S.R., Moscow, March 2-13, 1938” (Publ. People’s Commissariat of 司法（官） of the U.S.S.R., Moscow, 1938). Bold and indented paragraphs are not formatted in that way in the source text. This is done here only, for the 目的 of 強調する／ストレスing 確かな passages. /KET